Hacker News Reader

Comment by awb | Hacker News Reader

It sounds like the aggressive behavior was measured pretty soon after hitting the punching bag. It would be interesting to run the test again after the adrenaline has worn off.

I don't think proponents of catharsis are claiming that screaming at a tree if going to instantly make you calmer, it's that later that day you might feel better.

Also, participants were instructed to focus their anger on the perpetrator of the criticism, whereas it's probably healthier and more effective to simply focus on releasing your aggression.

Or, a combo study would be interesting where participants are instructed to hit a punching bag and then try to empathize with themselves or others, vs. only trying to empathize.

Anyway, it's an interesting study, but I'm not sure I'd rule out catharsis just yet.

View on HN

There's also this implicit conclusion that venting must not work if the levels of aggression don't change, but the article did say that blood pressure dropped. I thought the paragraphs on venting to friends didn't make much sense to me either--honestly, if something terrible happened to a friend, and they didn't vent to me about it, at least a little, I'd be wondering if we were still friends.

As an aside, I'd be curious to see the effects of venting on the subject as well as people that surround them. I'd also be curious to see the effects during a one-time episode and through repeated exposure.

I say that, because one of the worst things about social media is the venting. It's almost like folks are trying to suck you into a weird codependent relationship with them.

Do you know of a single study that supports catharsis? Because all studies I know of disprove or end up inconclusive.

I know catharsis was extremely helpful in my grieving process.

Realistically, I'm not sure how you would even design a study to accurately measure the effects. Any sort of cathartic experience would necessarily be self-reported and we all know the accuracy of self-report studies.

One of a few studies I've read followed people and found that people who engage in catharsis do it more often and have lower tolerances to irritants.

One of the earlier studies just had people's anger tracked(anger has a very clear physiological response). So no need to have it self reported.

For the value of an anecdote: in my grieving process, I tried several forms of catharsis: hitting a heavy bag, yelling, running and biking angry. In every case, it made me more angry. I got worse. The anger turned inward. It wasn't until I stopped that approach that I made any progress in my grief.

> Any sort of cathartic experience would necessarily be self-reported and we all know the accuracy of self-report studies.

That's not true. In the article, they mention observational studies wherein folks who vent are more likely to lash out. That isn't self-reporting.

> Since the students weren’t randomly assigned to either vent or not, it’s possible that the most anxious are the ones who chose to vent (so that venting was correlated with increased anxiety, not the cause of it)

Yes, that particular study may have flaws in its execution. But that doesn't prove that studies on venting are necessarily self-reporting.

I'm glad it helped your grieving process, and a big yes to the reality of "this is hard to study".

I have an intuition that catharsis as part of a grief process might be quite different (more useful) than in situations where the anger arises out of other circumstances.

I've seen someone close to me have some kind of a cathartic process and get a lot better. It also required finally facing (at least some of) their emotional blocks or trauma, so it's not like venting alone did much of anything. But I'm pretty sure that if they hadn't got the opportunity to air a lot of their previously suppressed feelings in emotional safety, the rest of it also wouldn't have happened.

I don't think aggressive venting alone is going to do much, but whenever I come across one of these studies that purport to show catharsis as not existing, I can't avoid feeling there must be more to the story.

Some people are also going to interpret "catharsis/venting does not work" as meaning it's perfectly wise to not listen with actual empathy and just slam solutions at people instead. But that also doesn't work.

Tbf, this study only examines catharsis as it relates to anger, not grief. Those emotions involve different networks in the brain, so it's perfectly plausible that catharsis would work differently.

No, just anecdotally I've seen it work for other people and it's worked for me at times as well. But that's not to say some other method wouldn't have worked just as well. And "worked" is a loose term, that just means "happier and less angry", rather than some form of perfection.

I think this begs the question in assuming there is just one type of catharsis. In my experience, things like this can be done productively or unproductively, effectively or ineffectively. It's all about the execution, and different people use the same word for different things.

Anecdata but a good boxing session after a stressful workday always makes me feel better. High intensity running also works. Great for relieving various undirected frustrations. Especially of the angry kind.

Writing in a journal does wonders for the more subtle things. When your mind is running in circles trying to process something. The act of writing it out helps me avoid circles and get to a conclusion.

The only thing that never does much is bottling it up inside.

It definitely seems likely that physical activity is beneficial. I'd be curious to see studies comparing something like running vs. boxing. (Also weightlifting vs. cardio, or springs vs. long-distance.)

Additionally, one thing that's often obscured in studies (or the reporting thereof) is that different people are different. Studies say that running doesn't help people lose weight, but that's looking for significant effects across a population. For some individuals, it does. The concept of "ymmv" is incredibly important when you care about individual impacts.

Intense physical activity isn't necessarily violent catharsis.

I almost never engage in catharsis now, but I do go on half marathon runs when I'm stressed. They're not the same thing... as like yelling at my husband over random annoyances.

Almost 100 comments as of me adding mine, and you're the first to mention journaling so I have to chime in. It's better than some therapy I've had. Therapy can of course be hugely helpful if/when you find a decent therapist, but writing things down really is the next best thing.

I haven't felt the need to do it in years, since I replaced it with a concise log which doesn't usually get bogged down in details. Mostly because I purged the majority of my worst freakouts into text files no one else is likely to read years ago. This wasn't the only thing that helped me, but it was at least half of it.

It seems plausible that catharsis makes some people more agitated and perhaps unhappy.

It also seems likely that those agitated, unhappy people continue to struggle and don't give up as opposed to those who "stop venting".

"Do not go gentle into that good night. Rage, rage against the dying of the light." — Dylan Thomas

Don't give up, or train themselves to be agitated and unhappy?

¿Por qué no los dos?

I'm not persuaded that those who "stop venting" end up happier in the long run. It seems like a road to letting yourself be mashed down and convincing yourself that you lack power to change your circumstances.

I'm glad that Malcolm X didn't pay attention to all the people who wished he'd "stop venting".

Did Malcolm X vent by yelling at trees, punching pillows or griping to his friends?

You mentioned punching bags.

What if the punching bag is a person or pet or something able to hurt?

Sometimes their adrenaline never wears off so there is no test to run again.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com